Kolya on 23/12/2011 at 21:56
I'm still waiting for my country to tell me if I should use contraceptives.
Seriously the point of comparison you made up there is so thin and the differences between church and state so broad, it's no wonder jay pettitt keeps hacking on it. Although it doesn't get more interesting to see you both repeating the same arguments.
Beleg Cúthalion on 24/12/2011 at 13:03
What buggers me most is that you don't even use my argument of a church imposing its ideas on its subjects to confront me with the typical (and probably insufficient) theme of the evil all-controlling church, but rather try to point out that a secular institution doesn't impose anything because it's fundamentally different IYHO.
Kolya on 25/12/2011 at 14:29
I figured it was understood.
You see, if you were living in North Korea this comparison between state and church would make sense. A totalitarian state will indeed try to control people and impose its ideas on them.
Western democracies however only judge people's actions and even that is usually limited to infringing on someone else's freedom.
So there goes your vague point of comparison that both were "imposing its ideas on its subjects". Democracies actually don't do that. Instead they guarantee freedom of speech, freedom of the press and religious freedom (Art. 4 & 5 Grundgesetz), which is the opposite of imposing ideas on someone and the opposite of what a church allows and does.
So what is actually your argument here?
Beleg Cúthalion on 25/12/2011 at 15:18
Of course those ideas of freedom are imposed as well. As soon as you collide with these ideas and work against them (Zwickauer Zelle, nur als Beispiel), the state more or less politely tells you to step back. The mere fact that everyone considers it good and sound (which it really is) doesn't mean that it's not directly linked to the state or imposed by it, no matter whether you call it "guaranteed" or "imposed". Plus, when I hear or read some cracker-barrel slogans nowadays I even get the feeling that not everyone is content with the freedoms here in Germany.
If, however, you make up a qualitative or moral judgement, there probably is a difference in this aspect between the two institutions. Then you can say something like the Church is bad and suppressive (because it imposes ideas which you consider negative) and thus totally different from a secular state (which "only" guarantees liberal rights etc., which you consider good). And finally, congratulations, you've arrived at a rather wrong-headed argument.
Kolya on 25/12/2011 at 19:07
You are equalling freedom of speech with imposed ideas for the sake of upholding your ridiculous comparison.
Beleg Cúthalion on 25/12/2011 at 19:27
You're failing to see an obvious parallel, apparently because your view is blurred with prejudice. To employ this prejudice – whose point of reference is largely irrelevant to the aspect in question – for almost two thread pages now seems to me rather stubborn. Or maybe you guys just cannot differentiate between the two elements. Hell, the easiest objection would have been to say: "Well, there are still a few differences between the way a church and a secular state get their ideas or rights and duties across to their subjects." I compared the aspect of this "getting across", it's a structural issue.
